stMale)Geiser C. Challco geiser@alumni.usp.br
env <- "stMale"
gender <- "men"
to_remove <- c('S11')
sub.groups <- c("country","age","ed.level","intervention",
"country:age","country:ed.level","country:intervention",
"age:intervention","ed.level:intervention",
"country:age:intervention","country:ed.level:intervention")dat <- read_excel("../data/data-without-outliers.xlsx", sheet = "perform-env.gender-descriptive")
dat <- dat[!dat$study %in% to_remove, ]
leg <- read_excel("../data/data-without-outliers.xlsx", sheet = "legend")## New names:
## • `` -> `...10`leg <- leg[!leg$study %in% to_remove, ]
idx.e <- which(dat$env == env & dat$gender == gender)
idx.c <- which(dat$env == "control" & dat$gender == gender)
data <- data.frame(
study = dat$study[idx.c],
n.e = dat$N[idx.e], mean.e = dat$M[idx.e], sd.e = dat$SD[idx.e],
n.c = dat$N[idx.c], mean.c = dat$M[idx.c], sd.c = dat$SD[idx.c]
)
for (cgroups in strsplit(sub.groups,":")) {
data[[paste0(cgroups, collapse = ":")]] <- sapply(data$study, FUN = function(x) {
paste0(sapply(cgroups, FUN = function(namecol) leg[[namecol]][which(x == leg$study)]), collapse = ":")
})
}
data[["lbl"]] <- sapply(data$study, FUN = function(x) leg$Note[which(x == leg$study)])m.cont <- metacont(
n.e = n.e, mean.e = mean.e, sd.e = sd.e, n.c = n.c, mean.c = mean.c, sd.c = sd.c,
studlab = lbl, data = data, sm = "SMD", method.smd = "Hedges",
fixed = F, random = T, method.tau = "REML", hakn = T, title = paste("Performance for",gender,"in",env)
)
summary(m.cont)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.cont, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = country, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random) country
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0 Brazil
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2 Brazil
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3 Brazil
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9 Brazil
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8 Brazil
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3 Brazil
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5 Brazil
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5 China
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0 Brazil
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4 Brazil
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## country = Brazil 9 -0.0151 [-0.2014; 0.1712] 0 0 4.61 0.0%
## country = China 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.01 1 0.9058
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = country, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random) country
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0 Brazil
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2 Brazil
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3 Brazil
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9 Brazil
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8 Brazil
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3 Brazil
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5 Brazil
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5 China
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0 Brazil
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4 Brazil
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## country = Brazil 9 -0.0151 [-0.2014; 0.1712] 0 0 4.61 0.0%
## country = China 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.01 1 0.9058
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = ed.level, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random) ed.level
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0 upper-secundary
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2 upper-secundary
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3 upper-secundary
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9 higher-education
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8 higher-education
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3 higher-education
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5 unknown
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5 unknown
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0 unknown
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4 upper-secundary
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## ed.level = upper-secundary 4 0.0629 [-0.0320; 0.1579] 0 0 0.09 0.0%
## ed.level = higher-education 3 -0.1053 [-1.3579; 1.1473] 0.0881 0.2968 3.75 46.7%
## ed.level = unknown 3 -0.0534 [-0.4235; 0.3166] 0 0 0.50 0.0%
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 1.92 2 0.3833
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = intervention, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## intervention
## S1 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## intervention = Gender-stereotype color, rankin ... 9 -0.0330 [-0.2242; 0.1582] 0 0 4.40 0.0%
## intervention = Gender-stereotyped motivational ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.25 1 0.6186
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `country:age`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random) country:age
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0 Brazil:adolescent
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2 Brazil:adolescent
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3 Brazil:adolescent
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9 Brazil:adult
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8 Brazil:adult
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3 Brazil:adult
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5 Brazil:adult
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5 China:no-restriction
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0 Brazil:no-restriction
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4 Brazil:adolescence
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## country:age = Brazil:adolescent 3 0.0306 [-0.1185; 0.1797] 0 0 0.04 0.0%
## country:age = Brazil:adult 4 -0.0149 [-0.5770; 0.5472] <0.0001 0.0007 3.85 22.2%
## country:age = China:no-restriction 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- -- 0.00 --
## country:age = Brazil:no-restriction 1 -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] -- -- 0.00 --
## country:age = Brazil:adolescence 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.87 4 0.9294
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `country:ed.level`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random) country:ed.level
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0 Brazil:upper-secundary
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2 Brazil:upper-secundary
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3 Brazil:upper-secundary
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9 Brazil:higher-education
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8 Brazil:higher-education
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3 Brazil:higher-education
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5 Brazil:unknown
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5 China:unknown
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0 Brazil:unknown
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4 Brazil:upper-secundary
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## country:ed.level = Brazil:upper-secundary 4 0.0629 [-0.0320; 0.1579] 0 0 0.09 0.0%
## country:ed.level = Brazil:higher-education 3 -0.1053 [-1.3579; 1.1473] 0.0881 0.2968 3.75 46.7%
## country:ed.level = Brazil:unknown 2 -0.0726 [-1.6808; 1.5356] 0 0 0.45 0.0%
## country:ed.level = China:unknown 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 1.39 3 0.7072
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `country:intervention`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## country:intervention
## S1 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU China:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs Brazil:Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q I^2
## country:intervention = Brazil:Gender-stereotype color, ... 8 -0.0386 [-0.2560; 0.1789] 0 0 4.37 0.0%
## country:intervention = China:Gender-stereotype color, ... 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- -- 0.00 --
## country:intervention = Brazil:Gender-stereotyped motiv ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.28 2 0.8686
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `age:intervention`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## age:intervention
## S1 adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU no-restriction:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) no-restriction:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs adolescence:Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q
## age:intervention = adolescent:Gender-stereotype co ... 3 0.0306 [-0.1185; 0.1797] 0 0 0.04
## age:intervention = adult:Gender-stereotype color, ... 4 -0.0149 [-0.5770; 0.5472] <0.0001 0.0007 3.85
## age:intervention = no-restriction:Gender-stereotyp ... 2 -0.1273 [-1.4749; 1.2202] 0 0 0.23
## age:intervention = adolescence:Gender-stereotyped ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- -- 0.00
## I^2
## age:intervention = adolescent:Gender-stereotype co ... 0.0%
## age:intervention = adult:Gender-stereotype color, ... 22.2%
## age:intervention = no-restriction:Gender-stereotyp ... 0.0%
## age:intervention = adolescence:Gender-stereotyped ... --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 2.15 3 0.5425
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `ed.level:intervention`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## ed.level:intervention
## S1 upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs upper-secundary:Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau Q
## ed.level:intervention = upper-secundary:Gender-stereoty ... 3 0.0306 [-0.1185; 0.1797] 0 0 0.04
## ed.level:intervention = higher-education:Gender-stereot ... 3 -0.1053 [-1.3579; 1.1473] 0.0881 0.2968 3.75
## ed.level:intervention = unknown:Gender-stereotype color ... 3 -0.0534 [-0.4235; 0.3166] 0 0 0.50
## ed.level:intervention = upper-secundary:Gender-stereoty ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- -- 0.00
## I^2
## ed.level:intervention = upper-secundary:Gender-stereoty ... 0.0%
## ed.level:intervention = higher-education:Gender-stereot ... 46.7%
## ed.level:intervention = unknown:Gender-stereotype color ... 0.0%
## ed.level:intervention = upper-secundary:Gender-stereoty ... --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 1.11 3 0.7750
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `country:age:intervention`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## country:age:intervention
## S1 Brazil:adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 Brazil:adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 Brazil:adolescent:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU China:no-restriction:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) Brazil:no-restriction:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs Brazil:adolescence:Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2 tau
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adolescent:Gender-stereo ... 3 0.0306 [-0.1185; 0.1797] 0 0
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype ... 4 -0.0149 [-0.5770; 0.5472] <0.0001 0.0007
## country:age:intervention = China:no-restriction:Gender-ste ... 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] -- --
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:no-restriction:Gender-st ... 1 -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] -- --
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adolescence:Gender-stere ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] -- --
## Q I^2
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adolescent:Gender-stereo ... 0.04 0.0%
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adult:Gender-stereotype ... 3.85 22.2%
## country:age:intervention = China:no-restriction:Gender-ste ... 0.00 --
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:no-restriction:Gender-st ... 0.00 --
## country:age:intervention = Brazil:adolescence:Gender-stere ... 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.87 4 0.9294
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.sg4sub <- update.meta(m.cont, subgroup = `country:ed.level:intervention`, random = T, fixed = F)
summary(m.sg4sub)## Review: Performance for men in stMale
##
## SMD 95%-CI %W(random)
## S1 0.1020 [-0.7230; 0.9271] 6.0
## S2 -0.0146 [-0.7647; 0.7355] 7.2
## S3 0.0148 [-0.7882; 0.8177] 6.3
## S4 -0.8713 [-1.7827; 0.0402] 4.9
## S5 0.1029 [-0.4832; 0.6890] 11.8
## S6 0.1285 [-0.4460; 0.7029] 12.3
## S7 0.0559 [-0.4728; 0.5847] 14.5
## S8: Conducted by BNU 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] 6.5
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) -0.1973 [-0.7179; 0.3234] 15.0
## S10: Only use prompt msgs 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] 15.4
## country:ed.level:intervention
## S1 Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S2 Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S3 Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S4 Brazil:higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S5 Brazil:higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S6 Brazil:higher-education:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S7 Brazil:unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S8: Conducted by BNU China:unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S9: Albuquerque, et al. (2017) Brazil:unknown:Gender-stereotype color, ranking, badges, and avatar
## S10: Only use prompt msgs Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-stereotyped motivational message prompts
##
## Number of studies combined: k = 10
## Number of observations: o = 396
##
## SMD 95%-CI t p-value
## Random effects model -0.0119 [-0.1788; 0.1549] -0.16 0.8750
##
## Quantifying heterogeneity:
## tau^2 = 0 [0.0000; 0.1169]; tau = 0 [0.0000; 0.3418]
## I^2 = 0.0% [0.0%; 62.4%]; H = 1.00 [1.00; 1.63]
##
## Test of heterogeneity:
## Q d.f. p-value
## 4.63 9 0.8655
##
## Results for subgroups (random effects model):
## k SMD 95%-CI tau^2
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-s ... 3 0.0306 [-0.1185; 0.1797] 0
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:higher-education:Gender- ... 3 -0.1053 [-1.3579; 1.1473] 0.0881
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:unknown:Gender-stereotyp ... 2 -0.0726 [-1.6808; 1.5356] 0
## country:ed.level:intervention = China:unknown:Gender-stereotype ... 1 0.0335 [-0.7562; 0.8233] --
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-s ... 1 0.1040 [-0.4101; 0.6180] --
## tau Q I^2
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-s ... 0 0.04 0.0%
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:higher-education:Gender- ... 0.2968 3.75 46.7%
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:unknown:Gender-stereotyp ... 0 0.45 0.0%
## country:ed.level:intervention = China:unknown:Gender-stereotype ... -- 0.00 --
## country:ed.level:intervention = Brazil:upper-secundary:Gender-s ... -- 0.00 --
##
## Test for subgroup differences (random effects model):
## Q d.f. p-value
## Between groups 0.91 4 0.9233
##
## Details on meta-analytical method:
## - Inverse variance method
## - Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2
## - Q-profile method for confidence interval of tau^2 and tau
## - Hartung-Knapp adjustment for random effects model
## - Hedges' g (bias corrected standardised mean difference; using exact formulae)forest(m.sg4sub, digits=2, digits.sd = 2, test.overall = T, label.e = paste0(gender,':',env))
m.cont <- update.meta(m.cont, studlab = data$study)
summary(eggers.test(x = m.cont))## Eggers' test of the intercept
## =============================
##
## intercept 95% CI t p
## -1.335 -3.47 - 0.8 -1.225 0.26
##
## Eggers' test does not indicate the presence of funnel plot asymmetry.funnel(m.cont, xlab = "Hedges' g", studlab = T, legend=T, addtau2 = T)